[eDebate] Arms Control

Chris Stone cstone387
Sun Apr 20 15:50:33 CDT 2008


You're right, we have had talks about proliferation recently. Don't we get
that with Russia too? You should reread the first line of my last post. We
have had a recent discussion about US weapons posture except for CTBT and
TNW (which current debaters didn't debate). I also think the arms control
topic can talk about Russia. Greta's paper even highlights "new nuclear
agreements with Russia" as an option. The Russia topic paper doesn't include
things like human rights, the environment etc, so I guess I don't know much
about that option. About solvency advocates, can you tell me what bilateral
cooperation means? I still don't know. It seems pretty open and like the aff
would be able to do whatever they want. That's bad for stable negative
ground. My answers to 'selective cooperation' were in a different post. I
think Russell is just mad because Oklahoma can't win a BCS bowl and KU did.

On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 3:32 PM, Jason Russell <jasonlrussell1 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Weapons proliferation was in the China topic. Tactical nuclear weapons
> were in the Europe topic. The treaties topic was practically an entire topic
> about the CTBT. And, this year, the Iran aff was often primarily about
> weapons proliferation. It is an overused topic trope. And, Im not sure if
> Stone missed this, but Russia has a lot of nuclear weapons. In fact, they
> have about 1/2 of them. So, bilateral coop with Russia could easily be ON
> the issue of weapons prolif. In fact, I wouldnt be shocked if it were
> built into the topic (in the form of coop on weapons dismantling,
> verification of arms control agreements, including but not limited to test
> bans, tech sharing for non-nuclear weapons which smoothe the transition from
> nuclear weapons). The advantage of Russia vs. other topics is that there is
> more flexibility for affs who DONT want to only talk about nuclear weapons
> issues and/or military issues. This topic does not require that we only talk
> about strategic issues, but could include things like the environment, human
> rights, and economic issues that may give the topic some broader appeal.
> Everything thats "good" about a Latin America topic (come on, surely you by
> now know that this topic can not win) is more good about a Russia topic
> because it is instead about big, sexy Russia. And has solvency advocacy (did
> you *read* the paper? can you, in fact, read, period). This post is mean
> bc Stone is smelly and gross and deserves it. Also, I am in many ways
> aroused by the Russia topic and as a result want to crush it's resistors as
> the Motherland would.
>
> J
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20080420/101e6be9/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list